An intriguing possibility surfaced last weekend in the high-stakes poker game between Iraq and the rest of the world: What if Saddam Hussein, his closest advisers and their families, were to surrender power in exchange for the promise of a safe exile somewhere?
Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld floated the idea in one of the Sunday TV news shows and two other Bush administration officials endorsed it, albeit with grave doubts that Hussein would ever accept it. Some of Iraq’s Arab neighbors, most notably Saudi Arabia, also have suggested exile as a peaceful solution.
A peaceful surrender of power by Hussein and the top Iraqi leaders, and subsequent exile, is a very long shot but indeed far preferable to war.
The long-suffering Iraqi people would be spared the death and destruction attending a military invasion. Iraq’s neighbors–including Israel–would have less to fear about any spillover of a war into their own countries, or about Arab radicals destabilizing other regimes in the region. The U.S. not only would avoid a war but perhaps more important, the collateral damage of anti-American sentiment among Muslim populations around the world likely to follow a U.S. invasion and occupation of Iraq. That could be costlier than the war itself.
Yet desirable as Hussein’s exile may be, the only way to bring that about, or to force him into compliance with the inspection and disarmament regime mandated by UN Security Council, remains the threat of military force. And as long as the U.S. holds out that threat of force, it must be prepared to use it.
The Bush administration is acting prudently by accepting UN mediation to avoid an invasion while continuing to build up a formidable military force in the region to keep up the pressure on Hussein.
“Hopefully, there will be a peaceful solution,” Secretary of State Colin Powell said in New York. “But if Iraq does not come into full compliance, we must not shrink from the responsibilities that we set before ourselves.”
Hussein is indeed a master of Houdini-like, last-minute escapes–that is how he has survived in power since 1979 despite a series of domestic and international threats that would have knocked out a lesser despot.
In this latest confrontation, his tack seems to be a passive-aggressive game of pretending to comply with UN Security Council Resolution 1441 while hoping that international resolve to force full compliance–by military action if necessary–will fracture and falter. Germany has come out against military action, while others are arguing that more time should be allowed for the UN inspections to be completed.
The November resolution by the Security Council is not an invitation for one more game of hide-and-seek. Critics like to say that the UN inspectors, who are expected to present their findings on Jan. 27, have not found a “smoking gun,” that is, compelling evidence of Iraqi programs to manufacture weapons of mass destruction. But neither is there evidence that Iraq is anywhere in full compliance.
The 12,000-page report Iraq submitted to the UN concerning its weapons programs was riddled with holes. Most recently, UN inspectors turned up a batch of shells that could be used to deliver biological or chemical agents–and which Iraq had neglected to include in the report. Later, Iraq volunteered that it had found four more shells.
By accepting UN mediation and renewed inspections the Bush administration has shown patience and restraint. The U.S. is ready to work with international bodies and U.S. allies to avoid a military confrontation, including now considering the possibility of exile for Iraq’s rulers. But patience should not be taken for weakness or international willingness to fall for another one of Hussein’s wily survival games.
